"Kurtz was charged with battery on law enforcement officer, resisting an officer without violence and obstructing or opposing a police officer."

To me a victimless crime is something that causes no harm to others. Urinating in public, hiring a hooker, taking whatever drugs you happen to have in the privacy of your home, would, in my estimation, be victimless crimes.

Battering anyone is not a victimless crime. Nor is resisting an officer either with or without violence. Nor is obstructing a police officer. I cannot comment on the opposing a police officer because I don't know what that is.

Please note:

I am not talking about the underlying activity that led to the confrontation and arrest. It is my view that when you are out in public you have no right to privacy. Further, it is my view that public servants in the performance of their duties give up their rights to privacy; they may not shield action or inaction by claiming a right to privacy.

The trial will not be about that, because once the confrontation between Kurtz and the police started, the reason for the confrontation is not germane. Whether Kurtz battered, resisted, or obstructed will be up to the jury to decide.

I also want to make very clear that the header on the first bideo appears to be just plain flat wrong. Kurtz is not charged with anything to do with legally or illegally recording anyone.

_________________________
Take the nacilbupeR pledge: I solemnly swear that I will help back out all Republicans at the next election.

The policemen who stopped me last Sunday for running a red light was a perfect gentleman. Friendly, polite, professional. He wrote me a warning for the red light and ticketed me for no valid insurance card. It'll only cost me ten bucks and a postage stamp.If these are the goons out-gestapoing the gestapo then I think the gestapo may have gotten an undeserved bad reputation.

And American police are, increasingly, goons who out-gestapo the Gestapo.

The police are the enforcers for the criminal bosses. Based on the Canadian police goon tactics at the G20 summit, I'd guess that both they and their American counterparts work for the same criminal bosses.

Explain how you would charge Kurtz with battery on a law enforcement officer and resisting an officer without violence at the same time? And, what harm did Kurtz cause anyone?

Let's start with battery. Can we agree that hitting someone or pushing someone can cause harm? Neither you nor I were at the scene when this incident happened. But it is entirely possible that Kurtz shoved the cop and then refused his order to allow himself to be handcuffed. Two separate things, two separate possible crimes. A very good rule of thumb: never so much as touch a policeman on duty. EVER. With extremely good reason cops do not like that sh!t.

Then there's resisting a police officer. Compare this to the thread about the state Supreme Court ruling that you cannot resist illegal entry by a policeman. When you resist a police officer you are hurting someone; no you are hurting everyone -- all of society. The job of the police is difficult enough without having a citizenry which routinely interferes with the police in the performance of their duties. I have not read the Supreme Court ruling (it's on my list) but I agree wholeheartedly with what I have gathered so far. If a policeman does something illegal your only justifiable course of action is to seek a judicial remedy down the road (which may include an internal affairs investigation.)

Take this hypothetical: you see someone running from a policeman and you help the fleeing person hide under your woodshed. Have you committed a violent act? Clearly, not on the surface. Have you resisted the police in the performance of their duties? Certainly. That guy fleeing the police could have been a mass murderer for all you know. Your DUTY is to do nothing to prevent the policeman from performing her duty. I am not saying that you have to tackle the suspect (I did that once and do not recommend it as a really smart course of action), but hiding the suspect is and should be a criminal act. And in this case Kurtz's interference could have meant the escape of the possible culprit because he (Kurtz) distracted the policeman. I am not saying that the act of filming constituted such distraction unless Kurtz got so close as to be a distraction merely by his presence at that particular point.

Kurtz had merely to step between the policeman and the subject with the result of keeping the policeman from doing his duty to be guilty of a crime. No injury? If the guy gets away society is injured.

As to resisting an officer without violence:

What this charge often entails is a person who has refused an officer's orders to submit to being handcuffed. Until an officer has an arrestee under physical control he is justifiably in apprehension of his life.

Many years ago I was doing a ride-along with a neighbor who was a cop in DC. Some violent crime happened (a stabbing, I believe) and the cops had in their "possession" a man who said he had witnessed the crime. The cop in charge asked Pat to take the witness to the station for questioning by a detective; Pat handcuffed him (behind the back) and patted him down before putting him in the back of the cruiser.

I was horrified (due to total lack of street smarts.) Pat explained that no one was going to sit behind him in his cruiser unless he was incapable of doing anything aggressive. It turned out that the guy we took in had actually committed the crime. And, like Leroy Brown, he had a razor in his shoe!

Yes, there are bad cops out there. There are bad people on your street or in your workplace. There are bad people at the local laundromat. But luckily for all of us there aren't many bad people, nor, contrary to what numan would have you believe, are there many bad cops. The guy Kurtz confronted may well be a bad cop, but intervention out in the street does nothing concrete to get rid of him. If Kurtz had not interfered and gotten himself thrown in the slammer it's quite likely that he would still have his video camera with the incriminating evidence on it to take to the public.

_________________________
Take the nacilbupeR pledge: I solemnly swear that I will help back out all Republicans at the next election.

Americans are in far greater danger from their own police forces than they are from foreign terrorists. Ironically, Bush's "war on terror" has made Americans less safe at home by diminishing US civil liberty and turning an epidemic of US police brutality into a pandemic..

The only terrorist most Americans will ever encounter is a policeman with a badge, nightstick, mace and Taser. A Google search for "police brutality videos" turns up 2,210,000 entries....

One disturbing aspect is that the police always arrest the people that they have gratuitously brutalized.....the cops cover up their own crimes by arresting their victims on false charges that are invented to justify the unprovoked police violence against citizens. The most disturbing aspect is that the police usually get away with it.

The police are supreme. The militarization of the police, armed now with military weapons and trained to view the general public as the enemy, against whom "pain compliance" must be used, has placed every American at risk of personal injury and false arrest from our "public protectors."

For those with limited powers of imagination, here is a site which may correct that deficiency:

Explain how you would charge Kurtz with battery on a law enforcement officer and resisting an officer without violence at the same time? And, what harm did Kurtz cause anyone?

Let's start with battery. Can we agree that hitting someone or pushing someone can cause harm? Neither you nor I were at the scene when this incident happened. But it is entirely possible that Kurtz shoved the cop and then refused his order to allow himself to be handcuffed. Two separate things, two separate possible crimes. A very good rule of thumb: never so much as touch a policeman on duty. EVER. With extremely good reason cops do not like that sh!t.

Then there's resisting a police officer. Compare this to the thread about the state Supreme Court ruling that you cannot resist illegal entry by a policeman. When you resist a police officer you are hurting someone; no you are hurting everyone -- all of society. The job of the police is difficult enough without having a citizenry which routinely interferes with the police in the performance of their duties. I have not read the Supreme Court ruling (it's on my list) but I agree wholeheartedly with what I have gathered so far. If a policeman does something illegal your only justifiable course of action is to seek a judicial remedy down the road (which may include an internal affairs investigation.)

Take this hypothetical: you see someone running from a policeman and you help the fleeing person hide under your woodshed. Have you committed a violent act? Clearly, not on the surface. Have you resisted the police in the performance of their duties? Certainly. That guy fleeing the police could have been a mass murderer for all you know. Your DUTY is to do nothing to prevent the policeman from performing her duty. I am not saying that you have to tackle the suspect (I did that once and do not recommend it as a really smart course of action), but hiding the suspect is and should be a criminal act. And in this case Kurtz's interference could have meant the escape of the possible culprit because he (Kurtz) distracted the policeman. I am not saying that the act of filming constituted such distraction unless Kurtz got so close as to be a distraction merely by his presence at that particular point.

Kurtz had merely to step between the policeman and the subject with the result of keeping the policeman from doing his duty to be guilty of a crime. No injury? If the guy gets away society is injured.

As to resisting an officer without violence:

What this charge often entails is a person who has refused an officer's orders to submit to being handcuffed. Until an officer has an arrestee under physical control he is justifiably in apprehension of his life.

Many years ago I was doing a ride-along with a neighbor who was a cop in DC. Some violent crime happened (a stabbing, I believe) and the cops had in their "possession" a man who said he had witnessed the crime. The cop in charge asked Pat to take the witness to the station for questioning by a detective; Pat handcuffed him (behind the back) and patted him down before putting him in the back of the cruiser.

I was horrified (due to total lack of street smarts.) Pat explained that no one was going to sit behind him in his cruiser unless he was incapable of doing anything aggressive. It turned out that the guy we took in had actually committed the crime. And, like Leroy Brown, he had a razor in his shoe!

Yes, there are bad cops out there. There are bad people on your street or in your workplace. There are bad people at the local laundromat. But luckily for all of us there aren't many bad people, nor, contrary to what numan would have you believe, are there many bad cops. The guy Kurtz confronted may well be a bad cop, but intervention out in the street does nothing concrete to get rid of him. If Kurtz had not interfered and gotten himself thrown in the slammer it's quite likely that he would still have his video camera with the incriminating evidence on it to take to the public.

Huh?Legal definition of battery:Again, explain how you would charge Kurtz with battery on a law enforcement officer and resisting an officer without violence at the same time? And, what harm did Kurtz cause anyone? John Kurtz isn't facing a "hypothetical" 6 years.

COPBLOCK.ORG did an excellent job explaining the events surrounding John Kurt's arrest:

Quote:

The Facts:

Just before 2 AM on January 1st, 2011 John Kurtz left a private party on Orange Avenue and Church Street, downtown Orlando to investigate some apparent police activity on Church Street.

Kurtz approached the scene and videotaped the incident, which included the use of tasers, a violent take down, and a pepper spraying AFTER the suspect was subdued and in handcuffs.

Officer Adam Gruler repeatedly told Kurtz to go away and turn off the camera. When Kurtz informed Gruler that he knew his rights and wasn’t going anywhere, Gruler violently took Kurtz to the ground and arrested him.

After multiple attempts to deny Kurtz bond, relentless efforts by Kurtz’s friends, family, attorney and other privately contracted help, Kurtz was finally released from Orange County Jail after a full seven days behind bars.

Kurtz’s video camera with the evidence on it that would easily clear or condemn him of these charges mysteriously went missing. It was not in Kurtz’s personal effects when he was released from jail, nor was it entered into evidence. It is unknown what happened to Kurtz’s camera. However, at best it reflects negligence on the Orlando Police Department for failure to secure evidence; at worst it shows absolute corruption and evidence tampering.

John Kurtz is a peaceful person who adheres and promotes the non aggression principle. Kurtz is known by his friends as a pacifist who is much more likely to turn the other cheek, than to retaliate with violence.

The Evidence:

• The evidence against Kurtz is nothing more than the word of a few Police officers.

• The evidence defending Kurtz includes multiple third party eye witnesses and video evidence from the street camera on Church Street. All who show Officer Gruler as the aggressor, and Kurtz simply video taping.

About Officer Gruler:

• Officer Adam Gruler was named by the Orlando Sentinel as a ‘Hunter’ and one of the top Taser users on the force. Gruler is notorious in the poverty stricken area of Orlando known as Parramore for taserings, verbal abuse, violence and questionable conduct. Gruler’s Internal Affairs profile includes dozens of civilian complaints.

• Officer Adam Gruler is the same out-of-control cop who was recently caught on video unlawfully arresting a local Orlando News photographer!

(1) The GESTAPO and SD carried out mass murders of hundreds of thousands of civilians of occupied countries as a part of the Nazi program to exterminate political and racial undesirables ("Einsatz Groups"). About four weeks before the attack on Russia, special task forces of the SIPO and SD, called Einsatzgruppen or Special Task Groups, were formed on order of Himmler for the purpose of following the German armies into Russia, combatting Partisans and members of resistance groups and exterminating the Jews and Communist leaders. In the beginning four Einsatz Groups were formed. Einsatz Group A, operating in the Baltic states was placed under the command of Stahlecker, former Inspector of the SIPO and SD. Einsatz Group B, operating toward

The police are not out Gestapoing the Getaspo. Your staement is absolutly false.

Post a source for the police today comitting mass murders of disidents as government policy.

_________________________
***********************"The problem with people who have no vices is that generally you can be pretty certain they're going to have some pretty annoying virtues." - Liz Taylor

If you had bothered to look at what I said you would see that I surmised that there were separate offenses.

"But it is entirely possible that Kurtz shoved the cop and then refused his order to allow himself to be handcuffed. Two separate things, two separate possible crimes. A very good rule of thumb: never so much as touch a policeman on duty. EVER. With extremely good reason cops do not like that sh!t."

Please read what I said, think about it, and if you do not understand it, ask me about it.

I DID NOT SAY that he committed battery and resisting arrest "at the same time". I said that it was two separate offenses.

Please think about that.

_________________________
Take the nacilbupeR pledge: I solemnly swear that I will help back out all Republicans at the next election.

And American police are, increasingly, goons who out-gestapo the Gestapo.

Originally Posted By: Ozymanithrax

The police are not out Gestapoing the Getaspo. Your staement is absolutly false.

Oz, your posting is invalid because you are comparing apples and oranges. You are referring to the actions of a government determined upon Total War in Occupied Territories. The proper comparison there is not to the actions of the police in the home country of the United States, but rather to the actions of the US military and private mercenaries in Iraq and Afghanistan. There, the parallels with Nazi actions outside Germany are disturbingly similar.

The proper comparison is between US police in the Vaterland Homeland and the German police inside Germany before the start of the Second World War. There the picture is complex---with some things better in the USA, and some things worse.

As I have mentioned on another thread, the present-day USA imprisons about six times the percentage of its population as did Nazi Germany before 1939.

_________________________The ultimate result of shielding men from the effects of folly is to fill the world with fools -- Herbert Spencer

If you had bothered to look at what I said you would see that I surmised that there were separate offenses.

"But it is entirely possible that Kurtz shoved the cop and then refused his order to allow himself to be handcuffed. Two separate things, two separate possible crimes. A very good rule of thumb: never so much as touch a policeman on duty. EVER. With extremely good reason cops do not like that sh!t."

Please read what I said, think about it, and if you do not understand it, ask me about it.

I DID NOT SAY that he committed battery and resisting arrest "at the same time". I said that it was two separate offenses.

If you were there witnessing the police "helping" this gentleman out of his wheelchair, what would you do?

a. Poop on yourself?

b. Call the police? Hey, they are the police!

c. Video record the incident at the risk of a serious ass kicking and then being arrested for battery on law enforcement officer, resisting an officer without violence and obstructing or opposing a police officer?

There are some municipalities, right now, who have all their police outfitted with cameras, including their cars. I suspect one of the solutions, to a LOT of police bad things, is to do that. It seems that it would also record not only wrongdoing on the part of the police but on the part of whoever they are dealing with. Seems to me its a win/win situation and would reduce police complaints in the bargain. Do not even have an off switch on the cameras, they run ALL the time and make sure they are backed up regularly (wireless would be best, then it could be done in real time). When I asked my local police why they didn't have cameras I was told that it was simply too expensive and they didn't have the money.

Then I did a little research. A shoulder police camera can cost over 200.00 each and a car camera over 500.00 I really don't get this one. You can buy a digital video camera, about the size of a pack of cigarettes for under 90.00 so, I suspect, the prices are somewhat inflated. As I did my research I did notice that several sites had links to places grants were available to buy this stuff, at the inflated prices. I guess gov continues to have deep pockets?

Gosh, it is hard to have a symphony with only one note.... And paintings with only broad brushes get a little boring. Sometimes, it is even difficult to determine the subject.

Police videoing their activities is now commonplace, and it tends to reduce both inappropriate actions by officers and others, who are deterred from aggressive actions because they are aware that their actions are being recorded and that those recordings may be used as evidence. This "controversy" is almost entirely manufactured. The vast majority of officers are used to dealing with cameras and do not see it as an issue, when they are in uniform and on duty. It can, however, be an issue in some circumstances. I have personally seen a photographer interfere with an officer in a normal "stop and frisk" situation, and then get aggressive with an officer (and get arrested) when he asked him to step back. The photographer was provoking him deliberately getting in his face (and interfering with his performance of duty). The officer was professional, and only arrested him after completing the arrest of the other individual (who was selling drugs on the street). Following the story later, the evidence from the photographer was used against him in his trial - there was an issue about 5th Amendment in the case that was ruled against the photographer - as the officer ensured that his camera and tape were preserved (pre-digital recording).

I have also heard valid complaints that cameras interfere with undercover work - it is hard to work undercover when your picture is being circulated! So, there are valid concerns on the other side too.

Finally, a response to "explain how you would charge Kurtz with battery on a law enforcement officer and resisting an officer without violence at the same time?" In addition to the earlier explanation by churlpat lives (which was sound), there is also the possibility of charging both, as one is a lesser-included offense of the latter. For example, a simple assault is threatening an action. A battery is assault coupled with contact. If one is charged with both, the judge/jury can determine if it was a simple assault, or an assault consummated by a battery. Similarly, one can be charged with both resisting without violence and battery on a law enforcement officer. Upon conviction, however, it will be one or the other.

_________________________A well reasoned argument is like a diamond: impervious to corruption and crystal clear - and infinitely rarer.

Here, as elsewhere, people are outraged at what feels like a rigged game -- an economy that won't respond, a democracy that won't listen, and a financial sector that holds all the cards. - Robert Reich

And he did not: But more and more cellphones are becoming weapons of sorts to police, who are finding themselves filmed in public places and not liking it. Just about everyone has a cellphone, and just about every cellphone now shoots video of some kind.

The Transportation Security Administration is considering changing its policy on photographing security checkpoints after several videos depicting questionable incidents between passengers and TSA screeners were posted on Youtube.

NEW YORK -- In May, the Rochester Police Department arrested a woman on a charge of obstructing governmental administration after she videotaped several officers' search of a man's car. The charge is a criminal misdemeanor.

The only problem? Videotaping a police officer in public view is perfectly legal in New York state -- and the woman was in her own front yard. The arrest report of the incident also contains an apparent discrepancy from what is seen in the woman's own video.

More correctly unstated, the lady was arrested for "contempt of cop".......

My research indicates if she was in her own yard or porch the cop(s) have no case. Her verbal confrontation with the cops at a time when their adrenaline is on "high" wasn't smart. All traffic stops jack up cops and night ones even more. >Mech

More correctly unstated, the lady was arrested for "contempt of cop".......

That's what it appears.

Originally Posted By: Mechanic

My research indicates if she was in her own yard or porch the cop(s) have no case. Her verbal confrontation with the cops at a time when their adrenaline is on "high" wasn't smart. All traffic stops jack up cops and night ones even more. >Mech

If I remember the stats correctly, most felony arrests occur at traffic stops. Police are being trained to be more aggressive. It's no longer a case of "to protect and to serve," but rather "to command and to control," as well as bring in the revenue. Some time ago when I was stopped, the law enforcement officer asked me, "Where are you going?" They're being trained for a different role. Other people throughout the country from NY, NJ, to CA have also reported that cops asked them the same question, including where have you been? Whether it's your front lawn, back yard, or a traffic stop, these encounters with the police can easily escalate and get out of hand much too easily, and it's the citizen that will pay.

In any traffic stop it certainly pays to remember you're encountering scared armed kids....Nor do you know what has motivated the stop. Your vehicle or you might match the description tagged to a serious crime event in the past few hours. >Mech

I know one case where someone's van matched the description of one that just participated in a robbery. This guy is not well loved by the police and has a license to carry. The police immediately targeted his vehicle, although he doesn't have any criminal background. He told me that when he saw the squad cars surround his vehicle he immediately dropped his licensed pistol and raised his hands in order to avoid mistakenly getting shot in any confusion.

But entirely consistent with a militarized police force which is becoming more and more Gestapo-like and whose purpose is, as has been noted, not "to protect and to serve," but rather "to command and to control."

_________________________The ultimate result of shielding men from the effects of folly is to fill the world with fools -- Herbert Spencer

But entirely consistent with a militarized police force which is becoming more and more Gestapo-like and whose purpose is, as has been noted, not "to protect and to serve," but rather "to command and to control."

Based upon what do you claim it is "becoming more and more Gestapo-like"? That is not my experience, which I can detail if needed.

_________________________Life is a banquet -- and most poor suckers are starving to death -- Auntie MameYou are born naked and everything else is drag - RuPaul

A Google searc h is not evidence. I don't doubt for a second that there is police brutality. I worked for two years in an effort to reform police departments. But you asserted it is getting worse, and that is not true in my experience.

So give me a source that says it is getting worse.

_________________________Life is a banquet -- and most poor suckers are starving to death -- Auntie MameYou are born naked and everything else is drag - RuPaul

One might opine its random brickbats from the peanut gallery that's driving the "bunker mentality" syndrom so prevalent among police.

Damn easy to be "korrect" from the security of a warm/cool well-lit room in secure surroundings at ease and sipping one's favorite beverage........I suspect its a far different thing when the radio's blaring with traffic, lights are flashing and its dark/cold/rainy or the suspect rabbits, or is in a vehicle with tinted windows.....

Mech's Rule: In any traffic stop immediately acknowledge it by turning on your flashers. Proceed to the nearesst safe pull-off or wide verge and stop. Put your car in park. Roll down your windows if tinted. Put the keys on the dash in plain sight and your hands on the top of the wheel. Be polite, co-operative and if you have to reach for your wallent/credentials explain where they are first. Make all moves s.l.o.w.l.y.... You probably won't realize it, but odds are if its a two-man patrol there's a gun pointed at you, and if there's "back-up" maybe more.....

You aren't going to "win your case" there, but you might lose it, or make it worse. OTOH, your positive attitude/actions might result in a lesser or non-point citation.....Remember always you don't know what that officer's emotional state or driving motivations are; and he's armed..... >Mech

Good advice indeed. And pretty much what I do in the event that I get stopped. I've gotten along fine every time I've ever been stopped by police and there have been many times for a lot of various reasons. If I see a cop beating your ass, I'm going to assume you did something to deserve it. I am not going to distract the policeman by taking photos or videos.I aint your knight in shining armor.

Fortunately this isn't Nazi Germany, nor is it nearing those extreme conditions. President Obama is not a Monster. My local Police Chief is kind of a jerk, but not a Monster.Same goes for the county Sheriff. If you are terrified of what is generally a benign and peaceful country, I think you've let your terror get the best of you. You have created something in your mind that really doesn't exist, you have created something to fear.

The entire world is full of less fortunate people than the average American. These are not the folks we've been talking about. But once again, even these unfortunates who live within our borders are guaranteed certain rights. There will be and have been many mistakes. But even so, there is no need for any of them to live in fear of Law enforcement.

When the grits hits the pan and you don't know what the Hell else to do who do you call? The f**cking cops that's who. Not some melodramatic political junkie who is scared of his own shadow because he believes his own propaganda.

But don't forget that the biggest vandals by far are the sociopaths who rule America.

You clearly misunderstood my meaning because I was remiss in not completing my sentence. I will correct that omission :

Tell that to people in ghettos, Indian reservations, inner cities, rural poverty---to those in Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iraq, Diego Garcia, hydrogen bombed Pacific islands, Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos, Grenada, Panama, Chile, etc. etc. etc.---who have all suffered the very unbenign violence of a United States which has careened into the badlands of history, where all failed empires go to die.

Enjoy the company you find there. · · ·

_________________________The ultimate result of shielding men from the effects of folly is to fill the world with fools -- Herbert Spencer

One - or several - sarcastic/accusatory comments would be ignored. When they number in the thousands and appear in the media daily, it becomes a significant problem.

Far better, IMO, to publicly support all good acts by LEOs and privately express your concerns about questionable actions to the Chief, the Mayor, the Council Police Liason, or - in extreme cases - your state/province AG. Why tease an armed chained dog ?

Nice thing about the U.S. is you can take your case to court. In most traffic courts you don't need a lawyer although you may well have a fool for a client if you represent yourself ! >Mech

don't forget that the biggest vandals by far are the sociopaths who rule America.

If by that you mean the political clowns who are elected every few years then I must laugh.If you mean the multinational businesses which own them, then perhaps I will agree with reservations, for they simply play one nation against another for their own gain, at this point leaving most of them/us little but dried out husks of what we/they once were.But this thread is about law enforcement. Usually a local matter, handled by locals. there are occasionally overreactions on their part, but these overreactions are essentially because they fear for their very lives.And it's you they are afraid of.

Quote:

Keep a clean noseWatch the plain clothesYou don't need a weather manTo know which way the wind blows.

The case against a 28-year-old woman charged with obstructing governmental administration after refusing a police officer’s order to leave her front yard while she was videotaping a traffic stop has been dismissed.

WHEC reported a judge dismissed the case against Emily Good of Rochester, New York on Monday because there was insufficient evidence of a crime.

Donald Thompson, attorney for Emily Good, told News 10NBC's Ray Levato Tuesday they may sue the individual police officer involved in her arrest, the Rochester Police Department, "any or all of the above and that's something to be discussed and considered."

Of course she has a case, but whether it is a good or valid case or not is another matter entirely. You could go into a civil court and sue me for anything your little old heart desires and I would have to answer or possibly suffer the consequences of a default judgment against me. On the other hand, if the judge determines that you filed a frivolous lawsuit you might be in doodoo up to somewhere around the top of your ears. If that happened you might find yourself paying the legal costs.

Parallel to this is the nasty habit of right-wing kooks of filing huge liens against public officials with whom the kooks have a disagreement. The only thing that prevents you from doing that to every public official, from beat cop to attorney general of your state to your congressperson is the knowledge that you could conceivably even end up in jail for contempt of court.

_________________________
Take the nacilbupeR pledge: I solemnly swear that I will help back out all Republicans at the next election.

I don't believe that she has a valid case, unless the political environment has changed. Years ago, in a case more egregious than this one, the Supremes ruled that a cop has the right to be a jerk, and upheld the lower court's decision to dismiss.

I don't understand the parallel to this incident and the right-wing kooks filing lawsuits against public officials. Could you please explain any similarities that you believe exist?

Based on previous decisions, she may not have a case. Apparently cops have a legal right to be a jerk. You demonstrated strong legal opinions in the past and I was curious what you felt about this situation.

Originally Posted By: churlpat lives

The parallel I was drawing was not to the case at bar, it was the hypothetical case of your filing a suit against me or someone else basically for the hell of it.

It sure sounded like you were straining to make a parallel between this cop "performing his duty" by arresting the woman on her front lawn for photographing them and some right wing nut jobs for filing liens against public officials for performing their jobs. What do you mean by "the case at bar?" I'm curious: Why would you mention sanctions and frivolous lawsuits in connection with this incident? The "government" does use these sanctions to punish critics or anyone that embarrasses or threatens to expose corruption. Years ago, Ms. McClendon invited me to address one of her evening salons. She made a point to introduce me to the former president of the Confederate museum in DC, who had sued the CIA. The federal court assessed Rule 11 sanctions against him in the amount of 300k. These sanctions can and have been used to punish and teach people a lesson for having the temerity to challenge them. I believe that this was one example.

Four years ago, Boston police officers arrested a man for videotaping them making an arrest in a public park.

They charged Simon Glik with felony wiretapping, disturbing the peace and aiding the escape of a prisoner – even though all he did was hold up a video camera – and the man they were arresting did not escape.

The charges were quickly dropped and Glik eventually filed a lawsuit for false arrest, claiming his First and Fourth Amendment rights had been violated.

NW Ponderer, what's your opinion? Do you think that her lawyer will file suit?

Apparently my previous post got eaten by my computer.... what I was trying to say is, I think he will file, whether he should or not. I haven't seen the tape, but the description of the incident leads me to believe it is extremely unlikely that they would win, but I would almost guarantee they will settle. Any complaint against the officer would be dismissed based upon qualified immunity - he was in the performance of his official duties - and the city will have an incentive for it to go away. Probably in the six-figure range.

Now, why qualified immunity? Basic answer is this: government officials acting within the scope of their duties are generally immune from personal suit/liability (of course, I don't know the State's law on this, this is a general rule), and the government steps into their shoes. The standard for getting around that immunity is pretty high: The Plaintiff has to show the conduct violates "clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known." Harlow v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800, 818 (1982). SoThe qualified immunity test requires a two-part analysis: "(1) Was the law clearly established? (2) could a reasonable officer have believed the conduct was lawful?"

I think they would probably lose the suit on both grounds, hence the incentive to settle. Dismissal of criminal charges does not mean that the officer's conduct could not be deemed "reasonable" in a civil context (where the burden is much lower).

_________________________A well reasoned argument is like a diamond: impervious to corruption and crystal clear - and infinitely rarer.

Here, as elsewhere, people are outraged at what feels like a rigged game -- an economy that won't respond, a democracy that won't listen, and a financial sector that holds all the cards. - Robert Reich

The Jury is out after 2 long days of trial; the second day running all the way to 10PM on Thursday June 30th. John Kurtz has been convicted of resisting arrest without violence. John’s sentence, 30 days in a concrete cage, 7 days already served and 1 year probation.

The evidence … the cops word … several cops on the stand all with different stories .. each having changed their tune several times throughout the whole process. The kicker .. Adam Gruler, the arresting officer even testified that John did not resist arrest.

BOYNTON BEACH (CBS4) – Considered a role model by his peers and named “Officer of the Year” in 2010, Boynton Beach police officer David Britto has been charged with conspiring to sell more than 500 grams of methamphetamines between June 2009 and March 2011.

A year or two ago here in Florida, or rather Las Vegas, the FBI picked up the "Sheriff of the Year" in Vegas on corruption charges.

But entirely consistent with a militarized police force which is becoming more and more Gestapo-like and whose purpose is, as has been noted, not "to protect and to serve," but rather "to command and to control."

Based upon what do you claim it is "becoming more and more Gestapo-like"? That is not my experience, which I can detail if needed.

Phil, then how do you explain a TSA officer examining a 95 yr old woman's adult diaper?

When terrorists are considering implanting bombs in humans why is it such a far stretch to imagine their planting a bomb on the body of a person who may not even know or be able to tell others that such action was taken?

_________________________
Take the nacilbupeR pledge: I solemnly swear that I will help back out all Republicans at the next election.

Whatever goes, huh? This thread is about video recording a cop and you post some inane propaganda about sewing bombs in your butt, okay. No problem. Post whatever you think that you're supposed to post.

But entirely consistent with a militarized police force which is becoming more and more Gestapo-like and whose purpose is, as has been noted, not "to protect and to serve," but rather "to command and to control."

Based upon what do you claim it is "becoming more and more Gestapo-like"? That is not my experience, which I can detail if needed.

Phil, then how do you explain a TSA officer examining a 95 yr old woman's adult diaper?

Excuse me, but you chastised me a couple of posts ago because "This thread is about video recording a cop. Can you explain to me what has happened in the space of some 17 minutes to changed your mind?

I gave you one plausible reason for what the TSA people did. Was there something wrong with what I said? Or was it perhaps because it was I who said it?

And I searched and I searched and I failed to find where I said anything about "sewing bombs in (my) butt" (or in anyone else's butt for that matter.) The thing about the possible surgical implantation of bombs (internal explosive devices or IEDs??) has been reported several times both in the hated MSM and other more "reliable" sources.

You might want to check on that chip on your shoulder.

_________________________
Take the nacilbupeR pledge: I solemnly swear that I will help back out all Republicans at the next election.

When terrorists are considering implanting bombs in humans why is it such a far stretch to imagine their planting a bomb on the body of a person who may not even know or be able to tell others that such action was taken?

What does this latest terrorist threat have to do with video recording a cop? BTW- are you saying in your post quoted directly above that the terrorists can place or implant bombs on people without them being aware of it?

Maybe we should X-Ray you to see if you've got a bomb up your butt, and don't know about it? Having any gas or indigestion problems lately?

Have you had any X-rays lately or TSA scan? My post was in response to your following post:

Quote:

When terrorists are considering implanting bombs in humans why is it such a far stretch to imagine their planting a bomb on the body of a person who may not even know or be able to tell others that such action was taken?

Correct me if I didn't understand. Are you saying that the terrorists can plant bombs on or in a person without them knowing about the bomb? If this is what you said, then please supply a link, especially about someone not being aware of any such implant.

_________________________A well reasoned argument is like a diamond: impervious to corruption and crystal clear - and infinitely rarer.

Here, as elsewhere, people are outraged at what feels like a rigged game -- an economy that won't respond, a democracy that won't listen, and a financial sector that holds all the cards. - Robert Reich

On June 30th Orlando Copwatch’s, John Kurtz, was found not guilty on the felony charge of Battery on a Law Enforcement , stemming from an incident early morning New Years Day when Kurtz was filming a violent arrest on church street in Downtown Orlando. This verdict was primarily due to video evidence captured from an IRIS street camera at the corner of Church Street and Orange Avenue, which effectively disproves all 3 versions of Officer Adam Gruler’s story as to where, when and how the supposed battery took place.

Kurtz was however found guilty of the misdemeanor Resisting Arresting Without Violence from his arrest during this same event. Kurtz was sentenced by Judge Alan Apte to 30 days in jail for this misdemeanor offense. Kurtz is currently in jail and has no hopes or expectations of getting out before his full sentence has been served.

YOU are the one who started off on the tangent about the diaper on the 95-year-old woman. Go back through this thread.

No tangent. Phil asked numan:

Quote:

Based upon what do you claim it is "becoming more and more Gestapo-like"? That is not my experience, which I can detail if needed.

I then asked Phil, then how do you explain the TSA searching some 95 yr old woman's diaper? The TSA is an agency of the Department of Homeland Security, one of the largest law enforcement agencies in the US. I used the generic term "cop" when referring to the TSA's adult diaper search. Apparently the use of "cop" is what concerns you? The TSA is an agency of a larger law enforcement department. Whether searching some 95 yr old's diapers for WMD or arresting someone either in their front yard or on the street is revealing of a more Gestapo-like mentality within law enforcement.

Originally Posted By: churlpat lives

YES! I am saying that a terrorist could plant a bomb on a 95-year-old woman in a wheelchair without her knowledge if she is senile.

No you didn't say that. Reread your posts. You said (paraphrasing)that the terrorist could either plant or implant a bomb on or in someone without their knowledge. No mention of any 95 year old's wheelchair. I asked you how they could implant a bomb on someone without their knowledge? You didn't reply or supply a link. Did you mean to say that they could plant a bomb in a 95 yr old woman's diaper and, consequently, were correct in their search?

Originally Posted By: churlpat lives

If all else fails, read what went on here, guy. You started down this road in a post to Phil. YCLIU.

Correct. As explained above, I did ask Phil to explain how an agency of one of the largest law enforcement departments in the US could search some 95 year old woman's diaper and not be considered Gestapo-like.

churlpat lives apparently took umbrage at my reference to the TSA screeners as "cops" when I asked Phil how he would explain the search of a 95 yr old woman's diaper. churlpat lives should start his own thread on the TSA and body implants if he believes this new threat to be a danger, as I've suggested.

I gave you one plausible reason for what the TSA people did. Was there something wrong with what I said? · · · ·

· · · · When terrorists are considering implanting bombs in humans why is it such a far stretch to imagine their planting a bomb on the body of a person who may not even know or be able to tell others that such action was taken?

Yes, certainly something wrong.

Such a distorted vision of the plausible I can only imagine being the sad result of watching too many prole-feed action movies.

There are so many simpler ways of subverting America's laughable, incompetent, Potemkin-village "security" arrangements.

If you really want to increase American security, get your Nazi-like troops out of foreign countries where they have no business being in the first place, and reduce the predatory, parasitical military establishment to one-tenth its present size.

Edited by numan (07/08/1104:46 PM)

_________________________The ultimate result of shielding men from the effects of folly is to fill the world with fools -- Herbert Spencer

Bottom line, the haybag is still going to be prosecuted for "contempt of cop".....IOW not obeying a legal order by a uniformed officer to "cease and desist". At this point I'm in sympathy with the officer(s) at the scene. From their POV, she's not "spectator/observer" so much as "possible threat" behind them during a possible felony stop. >Mech

Oakland and hundreds of other police departments across the country are equipping officers with tiny body cameras to record anything from a traffic stop to a hot vehicle pursuit to an unfolding violent crime. The mini cameras have even spawned a new cable reality TV series, Police POV, which uses police video from Cincinnati, Chattanooga and Fort Smith, Ark.

Quote:

In Oakland, where the department is still under federal supervision because of a case in which four officers were caught planting drugs on suspects a decade ago, the cameras are like another set of eyes, said Capt. Ed Tracey.

John Kurtz, the Orlando Copwatch founder who was facing six years in prison for battery on a law enforcement officer, was acquitted of that felony charge last week.

But he was convicted of resisting arrest without violence – even though the officer testified he was not resisting – proving once again that Florida has an unethical and unconstitutional habit of dishing out resisting arrest convictions without underlying charges to justify the arrest in the first place.

Mr. Babeu says his deputies will start using the gadget try to identify people they stop who aren’t carrying other identification. (In Arizona, police can arrest people not carrying valid photo ID.) Mr. Babeu says it also will be used to verify the identity of people arrested for a crime, potentially exposing the use of fake IDs and quickly determining a person’s criminal history.

In point of fact, Joe, police in Arizona can NOT arrest people not carrying valid photo ID. There is a law on the books allowing them to do so, but the state is currently enjoined from enforcing it because of court actions against Arizona.

Quote:

Parts of the law blocked from taking effect while the case works its way through the courts include a provision requiring police to question people's immigration status while enforcing other laws if there is a reasonable suspicion they're in the country illegally. Other provisions that are on hold include: requiring all immigrants to obtain or carry immigration registration papers; making it a state criminal offense for an illegal immigrant to seek work or hold a job; and allowing police to arrest suspected illegal immigrants without a warrant.

churlpat lives, the point of my post was to show how some cops don't want to be photographed, yet want to photograph any citizen they choose, until everyone is in the data base. Another example of authorities almost schizophrenic response is the recent incident where a Woman Gropes TSA Agent's Breast at Security Checkpoint.

But now, a Colorado woman is accused of putting her hands on a TSA agent at Sky Harbor International Airport in Phoenix.

Court records show 61-year-old Yukari Mihamae grabbed the left breast of the female agent Thursday at the Terminal 4 checkpoint.

Police say she squeezed and twisted the agent's breast with both hands.

That prank is going to cost Ms. Mihamae both personally and financially.

Originally Posted By: churlpat lives

In point of fact, Joe, police in Arizona can NOT arrest people not carrying valid photo ID. There is a law on the books allowing them to do so, but the state is currently enjoined from enforcing it because of court actions against Arizona.

churlpat lives,what happens when an Arizona cops stops you for speeding and you refuse to show him your driver's license or an Arizona TSA agent ask you for a photo ID at the airport? They don't arrest you or prevent your from boarding?

A police officer from Springfield, Massachusetts has filed an application for a criminal complaint against a woman who recorded his fellow officer beating a black suspect while he stood by, according to The Republican.

The First Circuit Court of Appeals reached a crucial decision last Friday allowing the public to videotape police officers while they're on the clock.

The decision comes after a string of incidents where individuals have videotaped police officers and were arrested. Police officers across the United States believed citizens didn't have the right to videotape them as they conducted official duties, but issues like police brutality put the issue up for debate.

The First Circuit Court of Appeals reached a crucial decision last Friday allowing the public to videotape police officers while they're on the clock.

The decision comes after a string of incidents where individuals have videotaped police officers and were arrested. Police officers across the United States believed citizens didn't have the right to videotape them as they conducted official duties, but issues like police brutality put the issue up for debate.

JoeYou have failed to note one immensely significant point.....the courts are TOTALLY IRRELEVANT... what is it about this point that escapes you? What the courts do or dont't do is irrelevant. The justices who sit on these courts and make these decisions are IRRELEVANT!!!!!

And most importa of all... why you absolutely MUST UNDERSTAND.... the people who nominate the judges.. and the people who confirm them.... these people are ALL IRRELEVANT.

I hope that is all clear.... because I have on VERY good authority from mebers of this forum that this is absolutely true... and therefore you should never consider how your vote for a given politician might affect the judges that are nominated and confirmed... because..... this function of elected politicians is TOTALLY IRRELEVANT!

Judges are irrelevantdecisions that judges make, irrelevantwhat happens in court rooms, also irrelevant

GOt it?

So pleasestop pretending like it makes a bit of difference whether people are sent to prison for videotaping police officers behavior....

I am sure if you ask any of the accused... they will confirmthe absolute fact that the courts are irrelevant.

Edited by Ardy (10/27/1107:41 AM)

_________________________
"It's not a lie if you believe it." -- George CostanzaThe whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves. --Bertrand Russel

I don't know whether you're being sarcastic or not, but I'll briefly relate one or two of my personal experiences. There are others. I had a federal criminal investigator charge me with USC 1001. I charged him with the same and a few more in both federal and state courts. His charges were fraudulent and intended to silence me. I suspect that my first lawyer and then my second lawyer were tampered with. I proceeded pro se. I did what my lawyers failed to do: discovery. I deposed corporate officials and even their legal counsel, who all categorically denied having any knowledge of either this criminal investigator or his "investigation." The difference between our charges? I could prove mine and the criminal investigator couldn't prove his. As a matter of fact, he fabricated his entire investigation. However, the court protected him and some special agents.

Another incident that I'll share with you is that although I did a press conference at the Washington DC press club and even appeared on a PRIMETIME segment in which I charged a government agency with a felony, the state that I resided in at the time didn't regard that as whistle-blowing. They wanted their UCB money back. I told them to come and get it. They tried. I filed an appeal in the state superior court. After my appeal sat there for almost 4 yrs (and I did what I could to move it), the court appointed a new judge (incidentally, the new chief judge of the civil division)who agreed with the state that "condition precedent didn't exist" so that I had no case. In other words, after I filed my appeal, the state offered to stop coming after me if I dropped my appeal. I refused. I wanted a legal decision, and not just my opinion. I have other experiences in both federal and state court. Some of the stuff I stumbled into and attempted to resolve was pretty heavy. No theory or movie, tv, comic crap here. Eventually, "they" told me that they won't allow me in court. I can't prove that as "they" didn't send me a certified return receipt letter, but notified me through other more unofficial means. You may or may not realize this, but there are some cases that they don't let into court. I've simplified, condensed, and "sanitized" my points. GOT IT?

[quote=Joe Keegan] [You have failed to note one immensely significant point.....the courts are TOTALLY IRRELEVANT... what is it about this point that escapes you? What the courts do or dont't do is irrelevant. The justices who sit on these courts and make these decisions are IRRELEVANT!!!!!

You might as well include congress, at least as far as the peasants are concerned.

Ardy,Were you being sarcastic when you said that the Federal Reserve was a government agency or do you actually believe that?

Joewe have been over all that before, and I doub either of us will change our minds

Lets just say that as long as the head of the fed is nominated by the pres, and approved by the congress, and gets congress approved civil service pay package.... I am thinking the "FED" is a FEDERAL org

_________________________
"It's not a lie if you believe it." -- George CostanzaThe whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves. --Bertrand Russel

Do you have any actual experience with our legal/"justice" system, besides what you see in the movies or on TV or read in the papers/funny pages? I've noticed that the only ones who believe in it haven't experienced it. So, have you experienced it, and if so have you ever brought a complaint against any governmental entity or minion(s)?

The owner of the popular downtown diner George’s — where Mayor Bloomberg and Police Commissioner Ray Kelly have dined — wound up in hot water after he tried to skewer a city health inspector by recording his visit on an iPhone.

Irked
enthusiast
Registered: 12/14/05
Posts: 3456
Loc: Somewhere out in left field

Naturally, if the owner had not taken a picture of the inspector, his diner would not have been closed. Another example of worthless government intrusion in private business. We need to get rid of these fascist "health inspectors".

_________________________
How eager they are to be slaves - Tiberius Caesar

Coulda tripped out easy, but I've changed my ways - Donovan

I consider myself to be a laid back type and quite tolerant on most issues - AB Breivik

Irked, if you were a health inspector, or any kind of inspector, would you care if someone either filmed or photographed you, especially if it were in their own establishment and you were performing your official duties in accordance to the rules and regs and it didn't interfere with you performing your legitimate duties?

Irked
enthusiast
Registered: 12/14/05
Posts: 3456
Loc: Somewhere out in left field

First, I would never participate as a member of the Collectivist coercion machine called government. But if in some alternate universe I was "legally" violating the Private Property Rights of a Citizen by "inspecting" the health and safety of the Private Citizen's business, I would not care a fig whether my picture was taken or not. Apparently, all these inspectors are very shutter shy. According to the article, a different inspector gave the establishment a poor rating the month before and threatened to sanction the business if improvements were not made. The only explanation is that the business owner took the picture of the previous inspector as well. How else could he have gotten such a poor rating?

_________________________
How eager they are to be slaves - Tiberius Caesar

Coulda tripped out easy, but I've changed my ways - Donovan

I consider myself to be a laid back type and quite tolerant on most issues - AB Breivik

I don't know. I'm all in favor of regulation, proper inspection, and legitimate enforcement of the laws, equally and impartially enforced. Why we're talking about regulation, let's re-institute the Glass-Steagal Act. What do you think?

I suspect that you may have had similar experiences or at least are aware of them. Our legal system isn't quite like what it's portrayed in the funny pages and on TV. I'm not a lawyer. I've had some government lawyer whistle-blowers contact me in the past. I've deleted all their email years ago. They appeared to realize that I understood how the system works. I suspect that you do, too. What can I say other than it's a disappointment, especially when you believed that "justice was blind" and the rule of law.

'This is a very good point to raise. It is precisely because of this psychological quirk of Normalcy Bias that I present my views in such stark terms. Americans, in general, do not appreciate how abnormal their society has become.

_________________________The ultimate result of shielding men from the effects of folly is to fill the world with fools -- Herbert Spencer

We bailed out the bankers, so why not the students? Student loan debt has exceeded one trillion. Let's bail out the students. Forget any debt forgiveness if they serve as a mercenary in "our" armed forces. Write the debt off the books. Hey, isn't it JP Morgan that owns the collection agency that's now going after these kids if they're behind in the student loan repayments?

We bailed out the bankers, so why not the students? Student loan debt has exceeded one trillion. Let's bail out the students. Forget any debt forgiveness if they serve as a mercenary in "our" armed forces. Write the debt off the books. Hey, isn't it JP Morgan that owns the collection agency that's now going after these kids if they're behind in the student loan repayments?

The banks the kids owe the money to wouldn't be really happy with that, Joe. Why not ask them to write off all the mortgages they hold too.

_________________________
Take the nacilbupeR pledge: I solemnly swear that I will help back out all Republicans at the next election.

Jeff, excellent question! I was laughing so much that I almost overlooked it. The video may be a fake. I don't know. Some kops may have put it out to lure some types to re-post it on the internet. If it's real, I suspect that he got his license back. However, I don't know it it's real or not. If it were, it wouldn't surprise. I didn't post some videos that I know that are real, because they were too upsetting. And, I have a strong stomach. Very perceptive the question. Like I said, I was laughing too much to question its authenticity. Joe K.

Waldo, Florida police chief Mike Szabo felt it necessary to arrest a man who was filming another police officer tase another man who was already handcuffed, on the ground, and not resisting. Somehow, Szabo thinks that filming from a considerable distance constitutes interfering with the police.

Waldo, Florida police chief Mike Szabo felt it necessary to arrest a man who was filming another police officer tase another man who was already handcuffed, on the ground, and not resisting. Somehow, Szabo thinks that filming from a considerable distance constitutes interfering with the police.

Quite disturbing, Joe. And yet more proof of the increased disrespect of U.S. police forces toward the people they are supposed to protect. We have become the enemy in our own country.

_________________________
"The liberals can understand everything but people who don't understand them."Lenny Bruce

"The cleverest of all, in my opinion, is the man who calls himself a fool at least once a month."Dostoevsky

A man who was sleeping at a synagogue and outreach center for troubled youth in Crown Heights was beaten by police Monday night after he resisted arrest. CrownHeights.info obtained surveillance video from the center's rec room, where the homeless man, Ehud H. Halevi, was awakened by police on the night of October 8th. Halevi insisted that he had permission to stay at the center, but he says officers refused to let him prove it, and video shows an officer beating Halevi when he tries to resist arrest. Here's the silent video:

The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday declined to hear an appeal of a controversial Illinois law prohibiting people from recording police officers on the job.

By passing on the issue, the justices left in place a federal appeals court ruling that found that the state's anti-eavesdropping law violates free-speech rights when used against people who audiotape police officers.

pondering_it_all
old hand
Registered: 02/27/06
Posts: 6832
Loc: North San Diego County

I read today that the homeless guy has hidden the new boots someplace out of fear of being killed for them, and is back out there barefooted.

Should have just given him some crappy used shoes from the Salvation Army, so he could wear them without fear of being robbed. In fact, if we made sure anybody could just walk into a soup kitchen or shelter and pick out a pair of donated used shoes, then nobody would ever have to steal shoes. Warm coats would be good, too.

A tourist photographed Police Officer Larry DePrimo performing an act of human kindness. He saw another human being in need and did what he could. He didn't have to do anything. Where he obtained the boots and socks or what the recipient did with them isn't an issue.

I don't understand why there are any homeless people in this country. If someone would kill the homeless guy for his boots, then they'd probably kill him for his coat or even blanket. Officer DePrimo saw another human being in need and acted.

A tourist photographed Police Officer Larry DePrimo performing an act of human kindness. He saw another human being in need and did what he could. He didn't have to do anything. Where he obtained the boots and socks or what the recipient did with them isn't an issue.

I don't understand why there are any homeless people in this country. If someone would kill the homeless guy for his boots, then they'd probably kill him for his coat or even blanket. Officer DePrimo saw another human being in need and acted.

So there we have two questions:

1) Why are there homeless people in the richest country in the world?

2) What kind of society is it that one person would kill another for a pair of boots?

_________________________
"The liberals can understand everything but people who don't understand them."Lenny Bruce

"The cleverest of all, in my opinion, is the man who calls himself a fool at least once a month."Dostoevsky

How is it possible that a dozen different motorists around the Russian city of Chelyabinsk were able to capture video of a massive meteor flying through the sky? Because almost everyone in Russia has a dash-mounted video camera in their car.

The Justice Department is urging a court to affirm individuals’ rights to record police under the First Amendment, filing a statement of interest in support of a journalist suing over his arrest while photographing Maryland officers.

TUCSON, AZ — A multi-million dollar settlement concludes the disturbing case of Jose Guerena, the Iraq veteran who was riddled with bullets in his own home during a faulty SWAT raid. Not only did these paramilitary police perform a haphazard assault on an innocent family’s home, they prevented their victim’s wounds from being treated after they shot him dozens of times. The hefty disbursement of tax dollars to the Guerena family may be warranted, but does nothing to reign in the aggressive department which is responsible for this murder, nor does it ensure the public that these inept Drug Warriors will not kill their family next.

Another disgusting show of police abuse was caught on surveillance camera, showing five Atlantic City police officers beating, punching and kneeing a man repeatedly before a sixth officer drives up and sics a dog on the man.

Quote:

Atlantic Police Chief Ernest Jubiliee told NBC10 that he viewed the tape of the incident that took place and “saw no reason to suspend or remove officers from their regular duties.”

He also sees no reason to release Castellani’s arrest report after NBC10 reporter Harry Hairston filed a public records request.

If you don't hear any sound, check the speaker icon on the YouTube video player. If you see an "X" it's on "Mute". Clicking the X, or dragging the Volume Slider with your mouse will un-mute the sound for YouTube videos.